For decades, the weapons found buried alongside certain ancient Egyptian princesses puzzled archaeologists. Were the bows, arrows, and daggers accompanying these royal women purely symbolic, ceremonial objects meant to convey status, or had these women actually used them? A new bioarchaeological reassessment of five royal mummies from the Middle Kingdom has settled the question. At least some of these princesses could genuinely handle the weapons they were laid to rest with.
The research, led by Dr. Zeinab Hashesh of Beni-Suef University, was published in the journal Frontiers in Environmental Archaeology.
Mummies lost and found again
The six royal mummies at the center of the study were originally discovered at Dahshur, a sprawling funerary complex of pyramids and shaft tombs, back in the 1890s. They were subsequently lost to the archaeological record for well over a century, only to be rediscovered inside the Egyptian Museum during a curation project in 2020.
Four of the six were sisters, daughters of the pharaoh Amenemhat II, buried in matching pairs within underground chambers, Princess Ita alongside Princess Khenmet, and Princess Itaweret alongside a woman provisionally identified as Princess Sathathormeryt. Their burials included bows and arrows, weaponry traditionally associated with men in ancient Egyptian society, and Princess Ita’s coffin held a particularly finely made dagger. Similar regalia accompanied the study’s two other subjects, Princess Noub-Hotep and King Hor.
(A) Map of the Dahshur necropolis. (B) The pyramid complex of Amenemhat II, showing the western galleries and the burial chambers of Khnumit and Ita (B1), and Itaweret and Sathathormeryt (B2). (C) The pyramid complex of Amenemhat III, highlighting the northern shaft complex, including the King Hor shaft (C3) and the tomb of Noub Hotep (C4). Credit: Z. Hashesh et al. (2026).
What the bones actually show
Although all six mummies had been carefully preserved through mummification, the soft tissue itself had long since turned to powder, and not every bone survived intact. Most unfortunately, the princesses’ skulls had gone missing sometime in the early 1900s. The remaining skeletal material, however, was well enough preserved for researchers to estimate each individual’s age at death, height, and sex, and to identify evidence of illness or injury.
The ceremonial dagger discovered in the burial of Princess Ita. Credit: Sameh Abdel Mohsen / Egyptian Museum.
The findings, case by case, painted a consistent picture. Princess Ita, who died between the ages of 28 and 34, showed strong upper-body muscle attachments consistent with habitual use of weapons such as maces or daggers. Princess Khenmet, who lived into her late thirties or forties, showed signs of thinning bone alongside notably robust ligament attachments. Princess Itaweret, who died between 20 and 34, had survived broken ribs and fractures in her feet, and her skeleton reflects the physical markers of a skilled archer. Similar evidence pointed to both Princess Noub-Hotep and King Hor having also practiced archery.
Hashesh explained what these bone markers actually indicate. The team found pronounced development in the upper limbs of these individuals, she said, development that correlates directly with repetitive, high-intensity actions like pulling a bowstring or stabilizing a weapon, evidence that these were habitual activities sustained throughout each person’s life. That pattern, she added, directly explains the presence of bows, arrows, and maces in the women’s tombs. These were not merely symbolic offerings, but tools they had genuinely used.
Royal status, but not a life without hardship
The skeletal record also revealed the limits of what royal status could protect against. Injuries like Princess Itaweret’s broken ribs, likely caused by a blow or a fall from height, were far from unique among the group, and several individuals showed signs of persistent infection and possible nutritional deficiency. The sisters additionally shared rare spinal abnormalities, evidence suggesting their parents and wider family were closely related.
Hashesh attributes the injuries most plausibly to accidents, falls, blows, or other impacts tied to an active lifestyle, whether through hunting, military-style training, or other physically demanding pursuits. What stands out, she said, is that these injuries had healed well, suggesting the princesses had access to genuinely advanced medical care for their time.
The people behind the treasures
The research team is candid about the limits of what remains to study. The loss of the princesses’ skulls constrains what conclusions can be drawn, and the researchers have not yet been able to complete every planned analysis, including stable isotope testing that could shed further light on the possible nutritional deficiencies they observed.
Hashesh described a considerably larger ambition behind the work. The team’s dream, she said, would be to move well beyond simple identification, reconstructing these individuals’ full life stories, their families, their health, and even their political roles, in as much detail as the evidence allows. Beyond the science itself, she envisions preserving the remains, producing 3D prints for teaching and virtual exhibition, and displaying the mummies respectfully alongside their jewelry, weapons, and other funerary objects, presented ethically and in keeping with how they were originally laid to rest.
Their possessions, Hashesh noted, are genuinely breathtaking in their craftsmanship, and archaeologists have long focused considerable attention on preserving those treasures. The people who once owned them, however, have too often been forgotten in the process. That, she said, is precisely what this study set out to change.
Support Independent Ancient Content. Your support helps me create more archaeology posts, articles, and mini history videos:
Sources. Frontiers . Hashesh, Z., Gabr, A., and Walker, R. (2026). “Bioarchaeological Reassessment of Dahshur Royal Skeletal Remains From the Late Middle Kingdom (c. 1850 to 1700 BCE).” Frontiers in Environmental Archaeology, 5, 1844402. doi.org/10.3389/fearc.2026.1844402